Ancient aliens

General UFO stories

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Re: Ancient aliens

Postby RICH-ENGLAND » Wed Sep 07, 2011 7:57 pm

nice post james and props for the apologies to lcars.

i agree with james that this is a great subject and definitely worthy of some real investigation, and ill make the point again, its a very interesting show, but i really wish there was some counter argument or some investigation done by some neutral people as in scientists that know their stuff but are open to the posiibility and not the georgio "IT MUST HAVE BEEN EXTRATERRESTRIALS" tsoukalos of this world,

ive got a bit more watching to do and some more reading up on a few things and then hopefully i can contribute a bit and we can get a good thread going here.

just one thing that springs to mind at the moment, the description of the spinning mercury engine/device from ancient indian texts and its similarities to the alleged nazi bell aka die glocke.. did igor witkowski just invent the bell story from hearing of the indian mercury machine? or is there something to it?... i think ill look up the theories behind the mercury machine as im sure ive read in the past that the theory of the mercury does have scientific merit (i may be wrong)....

thanks

rich
ATS HAS TURNED INTO A "BALLOONATIC" ASYLUM
User avatar
RICH-ENGLAND
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:06 am


Re: Ancient aliens

Postby Tim Hebert » Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:02 pm

James Carlson wrote:I still don't think the ancient Egyptians built their pyramids using the same or a similar method, but I do agree that it was certainly possible, if I understand it properly, and I should have realized that immediately instead of making an assumption based on my own prejudices.

Tim Printy, in an earlier reply, correctly stated that the Egyptians had practiced various techniques, mounds, step pyramids and finally the end product, the Great Pyramids. So over a period of centuries they were able to perfect construction techniques.

The use of massive labor pool, slave vs. "works projects" has been documented, not just by our historians but also carvings on Egyptian monuments and temples. I took an art appreciation course for my first undergraduate degree, 1979, and I remember my professor claiming with pride that the pyramids were not built with slave labor, since payroll records were supposedly uncovered (slate carvings?) documenting it as so. Whether this is true or not, I really don't know since my knowledge of Egyptology is remarkably piss poor.

I saw, last week, on the Science Channel (not SciFy!) how the ancient Egyptians quarried and carved out their monuments on the actual quarry site. Lots of cutting, heating, and digging, then moving the item to its final place of placement.

Also, the Nile Valley was much different 3000 to 2000 years ago. Most of the quarried stone was barged in to closer locations to the actual construction sites since the Nile River itself was flowing differently than today. One hypothesis that I saw and read, was that the Great Pyramids were initially constructed as step pyramids with a giant ramp used to hall most of the stone in place. One unfinished pyramid still shows the remnants of the ramp.

The techniques mentioned above didn't require an advanced alien race to help, since the Egyptians themselves were, for that period of time, the de facto advanced civilization.

Tim
Tim Hebert
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 11:29 pm

Re: Ancient aliens

Postby LCARS24 » Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:37 pm

About the geopolymer thing, it should be obvious that blocks were cast in place. Other blocks act as part of the mold. The front part can be plywood, which the ancient Egyptians either invented or got from a previous culture, by the way. That's why you see the unique feature of the way they fit together so tightly without mortar between blocks. As to quarrying, all they had to do at the quarry was produce rubble to be carried in baskets to the building site. One of the ingredients of geopolymer is aggregate, in this case limestone dust and small fragments. There was no need to carve out and carry large blocks, although the Sphinx seems to be an exception, not geopolymer. The book at the Amazon link I posted covers this in great detail and is the product of more than a decade of historical research. But the video should be pretty convincing, They make one block just like those of the Great Pyramid.

I've seen geopolymer figurines that look like other type of rock. It depends on what you use for aggregate. Those figurines could pass for handmade museum pieces carved from stone, but really they're just cast in rubber molds, using a process few people know about . But engineers know. A Japanese engineer was once telling me about a unique problem in designing a dam, and I said geopolymer could easily solve it, He was surprised I knew about it, and said they had discussed it but that it was too expensive, even though it was a relatively small part of the dam that would need it.

Anyway, the Great Pyramid. No alien help required.
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
LCARS24
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 10:32 am

Re: Ancient aliens

Postby James Carlson » Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:10 pm

In addition to Tim's useful appraisal, we need to remember that the Egyptians weren't perfect -- they made a lot of mistakes at the beginning, even with the basic math used to create the idea behind the pyramids. What we see as "unfinished" pyramids were failures that collapsed under their own weight! They must have been tremendous disasters when they occurred, killing hundreds, possibly thousands of workers. The following summary comes from http://www.mmdtkw.org/EGtkw0600-Pyramids.html :

As Tim points out, the first pyramids were steps -- very basic (see illustration):

EGtkw0604hDjoserConstStages.jpg
Djoser's step pyramid
EGtkw0604hDjoserConstStages.jpg (125.95 KiB) Viewed 3974 times

Seneferu, the first pharaoh of the 4th Dynasty, had to try three times before he got a pyramid that was neither broken or bent. His third pyramid, which finally satified him, was later denuded of its outer casing showing its pink limestone core.

EGtkw0605aSeneferu.jpg
Seneferu's first three
EGtkw0605aSeneferu.jpg (137.47 KiB) Viewed 3974 times

Seneferu's first pyramid at Maidum was what is now known as the broken pyramid. Its main problem -- the reason that it broke -- was that either he or his architect tried to expand a perfectly good step pyramid without expanding its foundation. It fell shortly before or shortly after the expansion was completed.

EGtkw0605bSneferuStepMaidum2600BC.jpg
Seneferu's first pyramid at Maidum
EGtkw0605bSneferuStepMaidum2600BC.jpg (153.48 KiB) Viewed 3974 times

[more coming up ...]
Last edited by James Carlson on Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
James Carlson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:11 am
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: Ancient aliens

Postby James Carlson » Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:14 pm

Seneferu's first pyramid at Maidum was what is now known as the broken pyramid. Its main problem -- the reason that it broke -- was that either he or his architect tried to expand a perfectly good step pyramid without expanding its foundation. It fell shortly before or shortly after the expansion was completed.

The following three images show what fell and what stayed in place when there was subsidence in the sand, on which the outer step pyramid stood.

EGtkw0605cBrokenPyramid.jpg
EGtkw0605cBrokenPyramid.jpg (142 KiB) Viewed 3974 times

EGtkw0605dBrokenMeidum.jpg
EGtkw0605dBrokenMeidum.jpg (131.91 KiB) Viewed 3974 times

EGtkw0605eBrokenMeidum2.jpg
EGtkw0605eBrokenMeidum2.jpg (170.32 KiB) Viewed 3974 times

[more on the way ...]
Last edited by James Carlson on Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
James Carlson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:11 am
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: Ancient aliens

Postby James Carlson » Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:19 pm

Seneferu tried a second time at Dahshur. They began at a steep angle, but the underlying stone wasn't strong enough to support what had been built and it began to collapse. They expanded the base and decreased the slope angle, but halfway up it became obvious that the pyramid would fall if they continued. Another drastic decrease in slope allowed the builders to complete the structure with less weight, but it produced the squashed pyramid now called the "Bent" pyramid.

EGtkw0606aSneferuBentDahshur2600BC.jpg
EGtkw0606aSneferuBentDahshur2600BC.jpg (159.22 KiB) Viewed 3970 times

The Bent Pyramid retains more of its outer casing than any other large pyramid in Egypt. Apparently nobody wanted the casing stone. The second image shows the decreased slopes that produced the defective structure. It should be remembered that all of this was experimental: no one had ever built a true pyramid before this. It's not known whether or not there is a step pyramid inside trying to get out.

EGtkw0606bSeneferuBent.jpg
EGtkw0606bSeneferuBent.jpg (177.04 KiB) Viewed 3970 times

EGtkw0606cSeneferuAngles.jpg
EGtkw0606cSeneferuAngles.jpg (138.63 KiB) Viewed 3970 times

[hang on -- more on the way ...]
Last edited by James Carlson on Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
James Carlson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:11 am
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: Ancient aliens

Postby James Carlson » Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:25 pm

Seneferu's third try, now known as the Red Pyramid, was the first true pyramid. It has a shallow slope, but it proved the concept.

EGtkw0607aSneferuRedDahshur.jpg
The Red pyramid of Sneferu
EGtkw0607aSneferuRedDahshur.jpg (173.46 KiB) Viewed 3970 times

Some pictures of the Red Pyramid that are taken from a low angle emphasize the shallowness of its slope. The inside features a huge corbelled antechamber, at the top of which is the entrance to the burial chamber.

EGtkw0607dRedPyramid.jpg
EGtkw0607dRedPyramid.jpg (157.32 KiB) Viewed 3970 times

EGtkw0607fRedPyramidMap.jpg
EGtkw0607fRedPyramidMap.jpg (124.72 KiB) Viewed 3970 times

[more on the way -- be patient ...]
Last edited by James Carlson on Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
James Carlson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:11 am
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: Ancient aliens

Postby James Carlson » Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:44 pm

Khufu, the son of Seneferu got it all right the first time with his Great Pyramid at Giza. It was the highest free standing stone structure in the world untill some of the Gothic cathedrals of Europe were built, and it's still the most massive free standing stone structure.

EGtkw0608aGreatKhufuGiza2550BC.jpg
The Great Pyramid at Giza
EGtkw0608aGreatKhufuGiza2550BC.jpg (151.75 KiB) Viewed 3970 times

The purpose of some of the internal structures in this pyramid are unknown and may heve resulted from simple changes of plans. The purpose of the "shafts" from the Queen's and King's chambers is still being investigated in a series of, thus far, pointless television "documentaries" (in quotes because they don't seem to really document anything). The pyramid's owner was unknown until Vyse blasted his way into the relieving chambers above the King's chamber and found graffiti that connected it with Khufu. (Some say the graffiti is fake, but it's accepted by most scholars.)

EGtkw0608cKhufuPyramidStats.jpg
EGtkw0608cKhufuPyramidStats.jpg (172.71 KiB) Viewed 3970 times

EGtkw0608fKingsChamberPlan.jpg
EGtkw0608fKingsChamberPlan.jpg (163.82 KiB) Viewed 3970 times

As you can plainly see, if ancient aliens helped to construct the pyramids, it took them about as long as it would take ancient Egyptians to get it right. Aliens aren't necessary to explain the pyramids given the record of trials undertaken that were necessary to get it right.

In addition, if aliens were involved, their mode of transport was a bit more "earthly" than I personally believe aliens would otherwise require. For your consideration:

Several pyramid complexes included pits in which boats were entombed. There are various theories about why they were buried, but none of them have been proven. Among the theories: that they were actually used to transport bodies to their tombs, or they were intended for post burial mystic voyages in the afterlife, either to the pole star or as part of the daily voyage through light and darkness. Regardless of their use or intended use, one of Khufu's boats was found completely disassembled and in remarkably good condition. It has been put back together -- all joints are held with rope -- and is now in a special museum south of Khufu's pyramid [you know -- the big one]. The boat will be moved to the new GEM (Great Egyptian Museum) when it is opened in a few years at the northern end of the Giza Plateau. Another of Khufu's boats was discovered at the same time as this one, but it has, unfortunately, been badly damaged by insects that got into the pit where it was stored: the discoverers inadvertently broke the seal on the pit and gave the bugs a way in.

Two of Khufu's sons continued to add to the Giza Plateau, and it must have looked sparkling and awe-inspiring when the pyramids and their subsitiary structures were still in their white limestone casings. The best white stone came from Tura, but there were many different quarries in historic Egypt. For more information, you can check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stone_quar ... ient_Egypt.

[Thank you -- that's the end]
User avatar
James Carlson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:11 am
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: Ancient aliens

Postby bewildered » Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:59 pm

Thanks for the info, James. :)

I've watched many of the Ancient Aliens episodes and like any media presentation, it can be quite compelling. That's the nature of media: it engages the consumer and exerts no small amount of influence on the mind. Essentially this occurs on a subconscious level and most people are unaware of the process going on not necessarily under their nose, so to speak, but rather slightly above it behind the eyes and between the ears. :wink: A person might walk away from watching this entertainment seriously considering the assertions woven into the fabric of the media presentation. That's too bad.

@rich-england: I've worked in construction as well (definitely my finest working experiences). I had the opportunity to witness a crew of brick layers build a perfectly level and straight wall using no apparent technological aids at all save their eyes, hands, and trowels. The main contractor and I were certain they had made some kind of serious mistake as they never even once used simple string lines to check their progress, so after they had left on their first day on the job, he and I whipped out a laser level and some string to check on things. Neither one of us could believe our eyes...that wall was perfectly plumb and quacking like ducks in a perfect row. :shock:

I think people seriously underestimate the "technology" of experience when it comes to working with your hands. After some time in carpentry and framing I arrived at a point where I could reliably tell if something wasn't plumb by the "feeling" I had when looking at it. This feeling was nothing more than the effect of experience operating on a subconscious level washing into cognizance. It was something the old-timers possessed and I suppose I graduated from being a greenhorn when it began happening to me. Although it's been years since I last swung a hammer or cut risers, it's still with me...I can hang a picture on a wall perfectly with no aids save my eyes. :wink:

People also gravely underestimate the ingenuity of the human race, particularly as it applies to some of the rather amazing ancient construction that has survived the ravages of time. It's human nature to be mystified and dumbfounded when we run across an enigma from another era, because we process everything we encounter using the backdrop of our own experience. We can't imagine how an ancient culture could have moved or fashioned stone weighing many tons without the aid of machinery we ourselves are familiar with. This is only natural and because of this tendency we possess, the study of history is fraught with innumerable pitfalls. It's all too easy to assign the works of ancient (and ingenious) humans to the agency of the supernatural or "extraterrestrial."
bewildered
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 2:47 pm

Re: Ancient aliens

Postby Tim Hebert » Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:04 pm

Great info James! And very informative as to the historic building concepts of ancient Egyptians. I now have this erge to excavate my backyard looking for an important find. :D

Hypothetically, if Aliens did direct the Egyptians, then based on what James has provided, they did a piss poor job of teaching and assisting in the earlier construction of pyramids. Maybe in the Arcturus sector of the galaxy, the old adage, "If at first you don't succeed..." is a universal philosophical axiom.

With all the above said (tongue in cheek), the Egyptians finally said "screw it", let's build the tombs underground or in hidden carved out chambers in the mountain sides. Easier to dig a hole/tunnel rather than hauling tons of granite and limestone!

Tim
Tim Hebert
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 11:29 pm

Re: Ancient aliens

Postby Illudium Q-36 » Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:54 pm

That is quite an interesting read and one I had not heard of before. Thanks for sharing the info James, it's a lot to digest and is certainly a compelling theory. Of course there will be critics of that theory as well I would imagine however I would choose that to the AA theory any day of the week.

re: The AA show and it's theories, the thing is it's now a running series spanning 3 seasons of nearly 2 hour long episodes. There have been 24 episodes shown to date according to wiki so that is also a lot of info to take in. It's kind of hard to just pull a decent discussion out of all the material presented in the shows without actually having a place to start.To be honest I haven't seen all of the AA shows and I do enjoy them but I wasn't aware there was going to be a quiz after.
If you look at the AA wiki page the episodes cover just about every aspect of UFOlogy, archaeology, mythology and pure speculation they can think of. Many of the topics have either already been debunked or are understood how to have took place.

Take the Dogons for example, while the story may sound good once again it is a case being told one side of the story with many factual innaccuracies and evidence that they had learnt certain information about Sirius A, B and C from western visitors. Not to mention Sirius C which is to this date non existant. Plus the knowledge of the Solar System and Jupiters moons are off for a people who got their knowledge from spacemen, it represented more the current thinking of the time. It would seem the Dogons got their info from visiting Europeans more so than intergallactic space travellers.
It obstructs my view of Venus
User avatar
Illudium Q-36
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 12:38 pm

Re: Ancient aliens

Postby James Carlson » Thu Sep 08, 2011 1:01 am

LCARS24 wrote:About the geopolymer thing, it should be obvious that blocks were cast in place. Other blocks act as part of the mold. The front part can be plywood, which the ancient Egyptians either invented or got from a previous culture, by the way. That's why you see the unique feature of the way they fit together so tightly without mortar between blocks. As to quarrying, all they had to do at the quarry was produce rubble to be carried in baskets to the building site. One of the ingredients of geopolymer is aggregate, in this case limestone dust and small fragments. There was no need to carve out and carry large blocks, although the Sphinx seems to be an exception, not geopolymer. The book at the Amazon link I posted covers this in great detail and is the product of more than a decade of historical research. But the video should be pretty convincing, They make one block just like those of the Great Pyramid.

Looking over http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2006/12/0 ... s_arc.html, we note that:

The researchers believe that a limestone concrete, called a geopolymer, was used for, at most, 20 percent of the blocks — in the outer and inner casings and in the upper parts of the pyramids.

and this:

David Walker, a Columbia University geologist, said that Barsoum and colleagues have a strong case when considering the mineralogical constitution of the block chips they examined.

"Both sides in this controversy have good points. Some blocks are definitely natural and some are not," Walker said, adding that the mystery over how the ancient Egyptians may have poured concrete is "all the more intriguing."

At http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/tim ... nework.htm, we see:

Year 19, under his majesty the king of Upper and Lower Egypt NyMaatRe, son of Amenemhet, endowed with life, permanence, power like Re.
His majesty has ordered to bring him monuments from this august mountain, from the west of the wadi. The stone was being carved from this western mountain as it had been done before. These stones fell in such a way that they broke and not a pebble was left. Then the overseer of the works, herald of the audience hall, Meri says: One should make a ramp to extract the rock.
Then the ramp was built, these monuments were carved just as he had said. One had never acted so before.
Then he escorted ten statues of august [stone].
His team of quarrymen from the necropolis: twenty men. Workers: thirty men. Many mariners [according to the French translator, these were probably men handling ropes]: 2000 men.


This suggests that they cut the stone from the quarry, and that this exercise was very difficult, and always had been; they built the ramp. Taking into account the first reference above, at least 80% of the stones were not made of the limestone geopolymer, and the cutting and transport of huge blocks was at least very common.

The site above also establishes that:

An unfinished obelisk carved from the rock was not yet completely detached when it cracked. This is always a risk when quarrying. As layers are removed, the pressures on the freshly exposed rock change, different parts expand at different rates, and the rock reacts by fissuring. When these are more than micro fissures, the rock becomes useless.

One can still see the pits made by diabase hammer stones, which were used to pulverize the granite in order to shape it. Wet sand and sandstone were then used to burnish the surface. This obelisk, if it had been successfully detached would have weighed more than a thousand tons, three to six times as much as ordinary obelisks.

The quarrymen tried to salvage part of the obelisk by recutting it, but abandoned the attempt.

I would assume that use of the geopolymer would have enabled the Egyptians to carry baskets of limestone instead of building a ramp to move such huge blocks of limestone. If they used geopolymer at all, you'd think that they would have used it on all the blocks (not just the less than 20% of the whole), making the task much easier to complete overall. They wouldn't need oxen, for instance:

Moistening the soil turned it into a slippery surface, on which heavy smooth rocks or sledges could be dragged with relative ease, once they had been set in motion. The pulling was often done by people, though animals were employed at times:

......... The stone was dragged with oxen which his m[ajesty] captured [in his] victories [among] the Fenkhu ......... This is from an 18th dynasty quarry inscription.

The detached blocks of stone and finished or possibly just half-finished obelisks were moved to the near-by bank of the Nile. Special barges were built to ship the 100 to 500 ton obelisks downriver. From the biography of Ineni (18th dynasty):

I inspected the erection of two obelisks ......... built the august boat of 120 cubits in its length, 40 cubits in its width, in order to transport these obelisks. (They) came in peace, safety and prosperity, and landed at Karnak ...... of the city. Its [track] was laid with every pleasant wood.

On the other hand, according to http://www.aldokkan.com/art/stone.htm:

The finer white lime stones were not easy to quarry. One of the main sources for white limestone was the Muqattam hills west of Memphis. This stone laid buried deep from the surface, so tunnels and caverns had to be built to reach the quarry.

This might well justify use of geopolymer for only the white limestone, this being the more difficult to extract. But why wouldn't they use it on the rest of the construction? That's the point I find hardest to get past. Are their any disadvantages to the use of geopolymer made with "Low grade limestone"? It's possible I guess [and it is just a guess] ...

Regarding the "white limestone" in a discussion at http://www.cmc-concrete.com/CMC%20Publi ... 20ICMA.pdf we should consider this as well:

Based on the detection of a calcium phosphate-based composition in the “synthetic” white coating on the Lauer sample, and its subsequent detection in the underlying limestone, Davidovits proposed a synthetic origin for the entire Lauer sample. Present x-ray microanalysis showed a distinct zone of phosphorous enrichment at only one edge of the Lauer sample, with progressively decreasing phosphorous contents towards the opposite end to a distance of approximately 5 mm, and thereafter negligible and uniform phosphorous contents throughout the bulk interior of the Lauer sample. This clear zone of phosphate contamination in limestone is situated directly adjacent to the phosphate-based coating, where the porous microstructure of the casing limestone was invaded by phosphates from the coating. Phosphorous concentrations in the interior, away from this coating-influenced “contaminated zone” are negligible and similar to those found in the other casing stone (EA-491) and in the limestone from Tura. Therefore, previous detection of phosphate phases in theLauer sample (at significantly lesser amounts than that in the coating) merely epresents an artifact of contamination from the coating and does not in any way indicate a “synthetic” origin of the Lauer sample. No such phosphate enrichment was found in the other casing stone sample (EA-491) from the Great Pyramid of Khufu.

Besides calcium phosphate phases, the Lauer sample also contains a silica-rich microconstituent, characteristically spherical in shape, which is mineralogically described as opal-CT (a transitional phase from amorphous opal to tridymite/cristobalite). Despite its occurrence in many natural limestones, based on its detection in the Lauer sample only and not in the quarry limestone from Tura, a synthetic (geopolymeric) origin of casing stones in the Khufu pyramid was suggested by Davidovits. The present study detected numerous less than 10μm-sized2, silica-rich microconstituents characteristically near-spherical to spherical in shape (lepispheres) in both the casing stones (EA-491 and the Lauer sample) and in the natural limestone from Tura, but not in the geopolymeric limestone. Cristobalite is detected not only in the casing stones but also in the natural limestone from Tura. The previously reported “unusual” chemistries of these microconstituents are an artifact of various impurities (e.g., Ca, Mg, Al, Na), which these phases, like any other minerals, can accommodate. XRD studies of acid-insoluble residues determined the tridymite/cristobalite mineralogy, and SEMEDS studies determined the minor-element compositions of these silica-rich microconstituents. Contrary to the occurrences of these silica-rich microconstituents as isolated, very fine (< 10μm in size), near-spherical, “interstitial” phases between calcite grains in casing stones and natural limestone, geopolymeric limestone shows an overall uniform (i.e., non-isolated), homogeneous silica-rich composition of the binder along with high alkalis and alumina and no indication of a separate silica-rich microconstituent. Therefore, occurrences and variable compositions of these silica-rich microspheres of opal-CT both in casing stones and in natural limestone do not in any way indicate a "synthetic” origin of the pyramid blocks.

This study conclusively demonstrates that there is absolutely no evidence of an alkalialuminosilicate-based composition in the binder phases of the casing stones, nor is there any evidence of “unusual” constituents in the pristine, bulk uncontaminated interior of the casing stones to call for a “man-made” origin. Despite the detection of a man made “coating” on the Lauer casing stone, the stone itself is determined to be nothing but a high-quality natural limestone mineralogically, texturally, and microstructurally similar to that found in the quarries at Tura-Masara.

Based on the present scientific proof of the absence of a “geopolymeric” signature or any “synthetic” composition in the same Lauer casing stone, originally used as a “smoking gun” to support the concrete-pyramid hypothesis, the proposed geopolymer hypotheses of Davidovits and others, or any “new” hypothesis for that matter really has no practical credibility (let alone their astounding extension to both core and casing blocks, and granite/granodiorite/basalt/travertine/quartzite blocks, columns, pavements, and other architectural artifacts associated with the Great Pyramids) unless detailed and systematic research is done by a diverse group of scientists on actual pyramid samples of known provenances. A valid hypothesis must rest upon a reliable set of unquestionable data.

Despite much reported evidence of the use of zeolitic (geopolymeric) chemistry in the ancient technologies, its promising future in the modern cast-stone technology and as innovative building materials for sustainable development, there is no evidence of use of geopolymeric cement in the pyramid stones. Based on unassailable field evidence in favor of a geologic origin for the pyramid stones, and equally convincing results of the present laboratory studies confirming the “geologic” origin of the casing stone samples from the Great Pyramid of Khufu (originally used as evidence for a man-made origin), the author is convinced that the Egyptian pyramids stand as testament to the unprecedented accuracy, craftsmanship, and engineering skills of the Old Kingdom (2500 BC) stone masons!

I guess you can see it both ways.
User avatar
James Carlson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:11 am
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: Ancient aliens

Postby James Carlson » Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:08 am

bewildered wrote:I've watched many of the Ancient Aliens episodes and like any media presentation, it can be quite compelling. That's the nature of media: it engages the consumer and exerts no small amount of influence on the mind. Essentially this occurs on a subconscious level and most people are unaware of the process going on not necessarily under their nose, so to speak, but rather slightly above it behind the eyes and between the ears. :wink: A person might walk away from watching this entertainment seriously considering the assertions woven into the fabric of the media presentation. That's too bad.

It's to your credit that you caught it before being conscripted into that TV-weaned vidiot crew. No doubt you've noted that they're everywhere ...
User avatar
James Carlson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:11 am
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: Ancient aliens

Postby ufosense » Thu Sep 08, 2011 7:49 pm

Sorry for the late reply!

Illudium Q-36 wrote:Well I'm glad you narrowed it down a bit, there are many different aspects to the series that could be covered.


True. However, most of them are too far out to discuss here. Although I love all ideas - including the wacky ones - I'm not going to waste your time with something that is completely at odds with common sense. :)

Illudium Q-36 wrote:What is wrong with the explaination given in wiki for Pumapunku and why would that be less believable then the AA theory?


Certain claims were made in the show that don't seem to fit the data. The material e.g. was supposed to be so hard, that you would need diamond to cut through it. This hardly applies to the red sandstone which is the actual material. I found a good article that discusses this and I think you will like.

Illudium Q-36 wrote:That's the thing with these History(lol) Channel specials, they only air the biased argument and don't offer any skeptical criticism at all.


True again. That's why I'm here, for a healthy dose of reality. Thank you for that. :)
Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is an absurd one. - Voltaire
User avatar
ufosense
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 8:20 am
Location: Europe

Re: Ancient aliens

Postby ufosense » Thu Sep 08, 2011 7:52 pm

astrophotographer wrote:the Egyptians had a bunch of trial pyramids (the step and bent pyramids to start) they built prior to building the great pyramid. They were able to perfect ther techniques and manpower allocations based on what they learned on these efforts.


Thanks for the links. The "trial" pyramids are an excellent point and a good argument against the theory that aliens had something to do with the Gaza pyramids. For some strange reason, the show failed to mention them. :)
Last edited by ufosense on Thu Sep 08, 2011 8:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is an absurd one. - Voltaire
User avatar
ufosense
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 8:20 am
Location: Europe

PreviousNext

Google

Return to UFOs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 21 guests

cron